>> president director nolan. >> present. >> vice president brinkman. >> present. >> director borden. >> present. >> please be noted that director heinicke is can't join us today. announcement of sound

producing devices. >> [gavel] ladies and gentlemen, please, please. >> cell phones set on vibrate and call interference and the board ask they're off. item 4 is approval of the minutes. >> is there a motion and a second. >> second. >> okay. is there public comment. i guess there s good afternoon. >> good afternoon. i am the executive director of library users association. i noticed that your minutes have in some cases very extensive or relatively extensive descriptions of what members of the public have said, and in other instances only indicate whether somebody spoke in favor or opposed to an item on the agenda. since it's my understanding that the sunshine ordinance requires you to summarize what people have said from the public as well as to

indicate whether they favor or oppose i am concerned that you're not following adequately the sunshine ordinance and i would like to know why there is that differential in the minutes that i am seeing? >> thank you. >> and i would oppose approval of the minutes as they stand without summaries of every public comment that's in there. thank you. >> we have a motion and a discussion? any further discussion? >> maybe the city attorney would speak on what is required? >> i i don't know it's required butted you like to care to comment on that. >> the ordinance does require a brief summary of comments. >> [inaudible] [off mic] >> okay. so what do you want to do with this? >> directors so just to clarify so when -- for general public comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the mta not on

the agenda there are extensive summaries of what people say. the sunshine ordinance requires just a summary of what somebody said and whether or not they support, oppose or speak to neither so for when the board takes an action on an item i show whether or not the member -- members of the public support, oppose or neither, but when the item is not on the agenda then there is a large extensive summary of what was said. i am generally following the board of supervisors actions with these minutes. >> okay. good enough for me. members of the board we have a motion and a second. any further discussion? discussion? all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> thank you. next item. >> item 5 communications. please be advised that 14 has been removed from the agenda at the request of staff. >> okay. >> and that concludes item 5.

item 6 introduction of new or unfinished business by board members. >> is there public comment on communications? >> yes. >> what do you want to say? >> it's not clear to me what communications refers to, but i have sent through the secretary to each member a letter concerning our concerns with respect to item 12, the 19 polk bus so i hope that all the members have received this letter and i have a copy to give you when the time comes and i can give you to you if you like and a two page letter concerning the polk 19 reroute. >> okay. thank you. anyone else -- >> thank you. >> under communications we're set there. new or unfinished business. seeing none. number 7 is the director's report.

good afternoon mr. reiskin. >> good afternoon board and staff. a number of items to give you an update on. the first last tuesday was a big day in city, state and country. i'm not sure how to go about summarizing but i did want to acknowledge that with regard to the changes at the federal level. obviously there's a lot -- there's much more than we don't know than we do. this agency has a strong and deep relationship with the united states department of transportation and we expect that to continue. we look forward to working with them and the new administration. really not much more we know at the federal level at this point. just the main news locally have to do with -- there were a number of pron sigzs on the ballot that directly or indirectly impacted the agency. the main ones with direct

impact was prop j and the charter amendment that would have set aside funds for transportation and homeless services and housing. that was passed overwhelmingly by the voters and current count 2/3 report. prop k which was the sales tax that did not say so in the voter information was meant to be the funding source for prop j did not pass and it did not pass by a rather wide margin. as a result of that the mayor exercised his prerogative with regard to prop j to essentially invalidate it absent the funds to execute it. so the good news is there that when faced with the question should the city devote more dollars to transportation the voters overwhelmingly said yes. the third one directly related to this agency was prop l which

would have changed how members of this body, of your body, are appointed. it would have changed the vote threshold for the board of supervisors rejection of an mta budget. that also failed. and then there were a few other measures that will impact our baseline. i believe the increase in the real estate tax, the increase -- the establishment of a soda tax, and the dignity fund set aside all together will have an impact. i think it will be in the positive impact to the general fund set aside but we're waiting for the folks in the building to crunch the numbers and let us know what that impact will be so that's how we came out of the election and i am sure there will be more discussion as we go further down the road and we learn more about the final results as well as what changes will come as a result of what the voters did last tuesday. i wanted to just to note that i am sure that

nobody has missed it at this point but we started the first stage of construction along van ness this past weekend. there had been some activities that already started but these were thfirst that started to impact traffic flow. we were able to work over the weekend to do the first part was eliminating the left turns or most of the left turns which was the planned early phase of the project so we can start to work in the median. we will continue during the week, during overnight hours work that will be impactful like that will generally be done off hours and we want to make sure everyone is aware of it. i think the media covered it extensively and have folks plan extra time and alternative routes and updates can be found at sfmta.com slash van ness, -- one word van ness and you can get updates and sign up for

alerts and get real time over the course of the project information so i encourage everyone to do that. again it's sfmta.com /van ness. in terms of vision zero update a couple of items to report. the first and this is something you may have seen in the news also the department of public health here in the city and county of san francisco recently completed an analysis of the medical cost related from transportation related severe injuries that are treated at our county general hospital. they looked at a period from 2012-14 and found that the medical costs from these injuries amounted to more than $100 million or $35 million a year just at one hospital, pregy staggering statistics. it's the only level one travella center in the city so the most

serious and severe collision victims will end up there so $35 million a year in city and county funds being spent to treat people as a result of traffic collisions. there were more than 4,000 patients included in the analysis. average cost per patient of more than $25,000 and a total of 10,000 days of hospitalization. pedestrians comprise the largest proportion of the cost at 44% followed by motor vehicle occupants at 22%. motorcycles at 18% and bicyclists at 16%. not surprisingly the pedestrians were the ones that were the most severely injured while the motor vehicle occupants were the least severely injured and my only point in raising this it underscores yet another dimension how important vision zero is in the work that we're doing and try to advance and how our projects can really make a

difference so anything that we do out there to reduce the incidence of serious and fatal collisions will turn the numbers around which is what we all want. with regard to golden gate park i think we have been updating you along the way but we completed the last of nine speed humps in golden gate park on jfk park on the western part and people routinely travel i think seven to 9 miles above the speed limit and we expect it's higher at night. this came as a result in part of the mayor's august 4 executive directive that directed us to work in short order with rec and park to bring improvements to the area in six months. we did it in four months and directed us to work with rec and park on a longer evaluation of the park and used as a thory way and the

speeds traveling and make it safer so we're starting a dialogue with community members this winter to explore potential solutions for changes in the park and i may have mentioned this last time but to reinforce we will be convening with rec and park and open house and december 3 from 10 to noon in the golden gate the fair building and encourage folks to participate if they have an interest in golden gate park and making it safer. next vision zero item or update i wanted to give you a lot bit of an update about the embarcadero enhancement project. it's something i don't think we have really talked about here at least in quite a while and working with the port and planning and, public works to improve safety along the embarcadero and it's really being look at it much as a complete street potentially with dedicated spaces for the many

modes that are competing for space along the embarcadero including potential protected bike way. it's now on the city's high injury network, the embarcadero, which you know is the 12% of streets that are responsible for 70% of the severe and fatal pedestrian injuries. actually that's for all injuries. we had between 2011 and this year there were 102 people killed or injured along the embarcadero while walking or riding a bike. one was a fatality, somebody who was walking and there were ten cyclists severely injured so 100 people over the course of five years, so that's why we're working to make it a safer more comfortable street. this is from at&t park all the way up to powell street and looking how the street functions for everybody and how we can make it

safer. this thursday at pier 1 from four to 7:00 p.m. we will have an open house so again we encourage the public to join and help us think through how we can make this street safer. it's a very important street. a lot of san franciscans use it and people from out of town and in different ways and we want it safe and funded through the mtc through a grant with supplemental funding from us and the port and we will have very extensive public participation so that folks can help us develop and review designs and think about the trade offs, and again folks can get more information on our website sfmta.com /embarcadero. with regard to our operators and the role they play with regard to vision zero the more folks that we have on a bus with -- that's

operated by a professional operator and those trips that aren't made by individuals who are not professional drivers i think that's an important part of our getting to zero with regard to vision zero and to that end we honored 315 of our transit operators a week and a half ago had 15 years of a safe driving record and four of 35 or more years and one driving safely for 42 years, really amazing and driving safely means no preventable collisions for at least 15 years so it was a great event, great to be honoring our operators and great that there were so many of them that actually met the criteria being safe operators given the challenges of our operating environment and the increased congestion and other uses in the city so congratulations to our operators on that. and then

finally in terms of projects the balboa park station area and plaza improvement project. this is a project in and around the balboa park station which is right across the 280 interchange, one of the busiest transit hubs in the area and muni terminals and four lanes and busy bart station and muni above ground traffic and anyone that walked around the san jose geneva area knows it can be chaotic and this project is improve safety and accessibility particularly for pedestrians around the station and while improving system reliability for muni and a landscape median along geneva and sidewalk lanes there and pedestrian lighting, curb ramps and way finding signs around the station so we can

help gets the best folk whether going to bart, muni, above ground or below ground. we are also on the north side of that complex up on ocean avenue putting flashing bacons on ocean avenue at the 280 off ramp which has been a challenging intersection for folks walking and improving the accessity of the walk way. it's used more since bart put in the northern connection which is great but we want to make it safe. the work on ocean avenue began and last a month and we have been doing outreach and will have impacts and there's a lot of information on the website. we ask folks to be patient while the work is going on but make the area around balboa park nicer for people using it and particularly people walking to and from transit and lastly just wanted

to update you on the subway shuttle that i mentioned last week. we completed the second week of its operation and already we're seeing a positive impact on reducing crowding and improving reliability in the subway. the way we're doing it during the morning commute we have two one car trains that are shuttling in the subway. last time i said we returning them out to 22 understand and terraval. after we finished the planning and started operations we decided just to turn them at castro so they're running between castro and embarcadero and it's castro and church and to some extents van ness where we have the crowding issues so we're addressing those. we're slotting them dynamically into the system where we see there's crowding on the platforms. they have been carrying 100 riders a trip so they're making a big

difference and we found turning at castro is more effective than sending out to taraval. we monitoring this daily and will have a full report in a month or so. in the ach what we're doing is using the extra trains to fill in service on lines as needed so if we have a break down or we have some other disruption along the line we can slot into any of the lines and that's been helping as well where we have gaps in service or other anomalies so thanks for the support and having us do that. it's already making a difference and [inaudible] cole valley shuttle is as well and that concludes my report. >> [inaudible] members of the board. >> i did take the opportunity wednesday to ride through gold park and check out the speed bumps and they're nice and the cars have to slow down for them. i am looking forward to the public meeting and the next

step of the plan and it was surprising how much cut through traffic there is in golden gate park and except for the speed bumps and this time of year with the head lights it makes it more unsafe and you're blind when in a row with on coming head lights and i don't know if there was something unusual going on but the amount was disturbing and i look forward to the meeting saturday on the third and i hope we get a transformative plan for golden gate park and make it work for the next 75 years with the amount of pedestrian and bike and decreased traffic traffic we expect. >> with the things we're talking about and a separate entity and some of the things down we haven't been able to keep up and i am wondering --

>> we have kept up and the concept of crowd sources improvements is a great idea. we want to make sure that the improvements are actually going to make things safer and not cause any unplanned or unintended consequences. we welcome the activism. would love to get the ideas so we can evaluate and install where appropriate. >> anybody else? members of the public. >> [calling speaker names] >> [inaudible] >> thank you. >> [inaudible] >> hearing the comments about balboa park i wanted to let you know of communication inadequacy or inefficiency on the j line for people with disabilities. the digital information signs in the stations talk of the out bound j stop being moved. zero about where is the first accessible inbound stop. i have gone by that area this past

weekend because over three and a half weeks ago i reported to the multimodal access committee there were no signs. there is a mid-block high boarding ramp platform at san jose at seneca but the signs say "no m line boarding." that's all the signs that are there. there is nothing to say j line accessible boarding neither side or foot or bottom of the ramp. there is nothing at the minibus and trolley stops by balboa park, not for the 29, the 43, the eight, the 54 so passengers coming off the buses don't know where to get to j. now, maybe there's information in bart but there is nothing on your digital signs and no paper signage to indicate where do you go, so if you're coming from the airport at night and you want to take the j to the next two, three

stops and it's raining what are you going to do? somebody slipped up. you don't know where to go. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> terreek mamood. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon directors. you must be doing lots of good things but why we speak on these issues is to bring to your attention some of the problem we face on the street with the vision zero. anywhere you drive in downtown and some other areas the light night time, the street light is so dim. it's nearly impossible to see anybody coming in the crosswalk even in the middle of the road. the biggest issue of injuries and everything if not the day time during the night time we cannot see it. you must set up a committee to go into the street and look at

the lights. the design of the lamps facing upward in an old style lamps we cannot see anything in that light barely. i was in redwood city to drop a customer a few days ago and i was surprised and saw led lights facing downward and the right was so bright and i could easily see 200-meter way who is walking and who isn't walking so that would be a great improvement in the plan if you can do that one. thank you. >> anyone else care to address the board under public comment? under director's report. >> peter warfield. first of all there were nine items i believe on the directors. i wish there were explanatory documents and i would like to publicly ask from what the director is reading from when he is reading his report right now.

with respect to proposition k and j i think it should be noted that there were people who were definitely in favor of helping homeless and the mta to have a good public transit system, but did not want to have it funded with a regressive tax and perhaps -- and i know it concerns some folks -- a set aside which i believe was for 25 years which reduces i think it's generally understood accountability and my sad experience is growing that the mta is not as responsive and accountable as i certainly would like it to be and as i am learning others want it to be. with regard to van ness construction i think it's a catastrophe for removed service and stops for everybody and crossing multiple lanes of a

extremely busy highway during the day and night high 101 to get to and from the transit happening there. >> >> with respect to vision zero i am very glad that the director mentioned the public health department because one of the things they said in a prior report was not only that the pedestrians are by far the most vulnerable people in this city to injuries especially serious injuries but there's serious under reporting when you compare hospital records with other records which apparently the mta has, and especially the demographics are important. older people, disabled people, et cetera are much more vulnerable to severe injury and consequences and that needs to be taken into account by mta. >> thank you. anyone else ms. boomer on this one, on the director's report? >> these are matters discussed by director reiskin only. >> sure.